A hired dog walker sustained significant injuries when the respondents' dog attacked her while she was attempting to put booties on the animal in the respondents' home.
The appellant brought an action under the Dog Owners' Liability Act claiming the respondents, as dog owners, were strictly liable.
The respondents successfully moved for summary judgment on the basis that the appellant herself qualified as an "owner" under the Act and could not recover from fellow owners.
The Court of Appeal upheld the motion judge's decision, applying the definition of "possesses" from Wilk v. Arbour and confirming that a person in physical possession and control of a dog just before an attack is an "owner" regardless of whether she was acting under the instructions of the registrant owners, and regardless of whether the attack occurred in another owner's home.
